# Thread: VERY ODD PLAN ?!

2.

3. Let's see. Off hand, these two lines are the most obviously wrong:

- We only convert certain power to energy and since source power is infinity , then this energy must also be in size of the source .

- Magnetic force that is interchanged between stator and rotor isn't equal and symmetric , So this Law isn't applied in this case!

Additionally, all he gives are serveral badly labeled, badly drawn pictures as plans, which means it'd be difficult to work out exactly what he's attempting; however, it looks like he's using a set of rotating permanent magnets and some magnetic shielding to create an asymmetrical magnetic field (though note that asymmetrical field doesn't imply asymmetrical force).

Anyway. First point, there are no infinite sources of energy. If you think the magnetic field of a permanent magnet is an infinite source of energy... well, it's not. It takes energy to magnetize a magnet, and if energy is extracted from it, it'll lose its field.

I'll leave it to someone else to point out what else is wrong with this.

4. i think that one body must test that ...
who can test it on their university lab ?

5. As usual, the embodied energy of building the thing outweighs the energy we get out of it.

Q: Is these Magnets weaken after a long time?

A: Nowadays , Very advanced permanent magnets are produce and maintain their field for a long time.

IMO the only true perpetual motion depends on reproduction. A Pet Rock is a simple perpetual motion machine.

6. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Let's see. Off hand, these two lines are the most obviously wrong:

- We only convert certain power to energy and since source power is infinity , then this energy must also be in size of the source .

- Magnetic force that is interchanged between stator and rotor isn't equal and symmetric , So this Law isn't applied in this case!

Additionally, all he gives are serveral badly labeled, badly drawn pictures as plans, which means it'd be difficult to work out exactly what he's attempting; however, it looks like he's using a set of rotating permanent magnets and some magnetic shielding to create an asymmetrical magnetic field (though note that asymmetrical field doesn't imply asymmetrical force).

Anyway. First point, there are no infinite sources of energy. If you think the magnetic field of a permanent magnet is an infinite source of energy... well, it's not. It takes energy to magnetize a magnet, and if energy is extracted from it, it'll lose its field.

I'll leave it to someone else to point out what else is wrong with this.
Permanent magnets offer decent torque to a DC motor. And do apply a constant field that would normally have to be generated by a coil or magnet winding wire. Often for an entire lifetime. They do offer a certain type of free power.

One nice thing about ceramic magnets in a DC motor, is that if you get an AC current by mistake through an open break, and you get arcing. The permanent magnet DC motor will lock up. Where the coil DC motor will not lock, under AC current. But will probably throw the brushes off the armature at higher AC voltages. Limiting its rpms.

You can have a series type of DC motor accident, with a ceramic magnet motor. If one magnet goes dead or shatters, the motor can reach very high rpm's. You can also create a series accident with a coil type of DC motor. By wiring the coils in series with the armature.

Sincerely,

William McCormick

7. I'll put it simply. It takes energy to make a magnet.

8. I'll put it simply. It takes energy to make a magnet.
but i think it just takes energy one time for ever , because permanent magnets do't miss their own magnetic field !

------

in this regard so we can say that why designs don't rotate ?
can we draw that

9. Permanent magnets can and will lose their magnetism. Perhaps not with normal, everyday use, but normal everyday use doesn't extract energy from them.

10. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Permanent magnets can and will lose their magnetism. Perhaps not with normal, everyday use, but normal everyday use doesn't extract energy from them.
The ceramic magnet replaces, the magnet wire coil. And creates a field that would have to be created by a wired coil, fed by battery power. For a lifetime.

Is the wired coil a perpetual motion device, I don't know, but I don't think so. Ha-ha.

Sincerely,

William McCormick

11. For the lifetime of the battery anyway.

12. I'm hazy yet ...

Permanent magnets can and will lose their magnetism. Perhaps not with normal, everyday use, but normal everyday use doesn't extract energy from them.
But ferrite magnets can not lose their magnetism !

13. Yes, they can.

14. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Yes, they can.
No NO !

for example in electro motors there are tow permanent magnet.
in this regard motion come from impact BTW electro & permanent magnets
and if they lose their magnetism so electro motors must stop from working after a few months ...

YES ?

15. You misunderstand. Permanent magnets can lose their charge. That doesn't mean that they will lose their charge. In fact, normal use, including use inside electric motors won't demagnetize a permanent magnet anytime soon.

Perhaps someone who understands a bit more about this can explain why an electric motor won't wear out its permanent magnets?

16. I'd assumed the field also refreshes the magnets. That's wasted energy but appropriate where you can't be bothered wiring a stator in addition to a rotor.

17. All magnets in all motors and generators just push their own poles.

so there aren't difference btw Mr.shafiee's magnetic generator or an elecro motor !

so if ferrite magnets hold their magnetism , this plan hado to work and rotate forever ...

true

this is a short description about ferrite magnets:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceramic_Magnet

18. Attempts at perpetual motion involving magnets, usually arranged somewhat like a motor, have been proposed and tried tens of thousands of times for hundreds of years. It's like, more timeless than the boy who plans to be a rock star.

19. These free energy kooks do nothing but talk. Let them power up their house or power a city with their perpetual motion machines. Until they do that, it's not even worth reading their nutty ideas.

20. Here's mine: Rat infested house, perpetually powered by vermin running over hundreds of wheels.

21. excuse me but i don't understand yet that why his design don't rotate ?
i see that PDF file and designs and i think that one of the must rotate forever
can any body say why for example that why don't rotate ?

22. Why not forever? Friction.

23. Originally Posted by nuxle
excuse me but i don't understand yet that why his design don't rotate ?
i see that PDF file and designs and i think that one of the must rotate forever
can any body say why for example that why don't rotate ?
If you understand those sketches you are way ahead of me. Maybe you could explain why you think it would work, then I'll try to explain why it won't.

24. Originally Posted by Pong
Why not forever? Friction.
he say " that rotor don't push stator discontinuous ! they excrete continuously ! as result if this dominate on friction in one point , therefore motion is repeated in each position. So friction reduces only a portion of machine efficiency and total efficiency has direct relation with magnets forces.
i.e ,the more stronger magnets = more machine efficiency "
true ? the force is continuous and in each point if force conquest per Friction so the machine maintain its motion ...

If you understand those sketches you are way ahead of me. Maybe you could explain why you think it would work, then I'll try to explain why it won't.
i don't know any things , i post my question here for take answers ...
i'm Questioner NO Interlocutor

but in this regard i think that the stator push the rotor and it will be work
he sayed " it will not rotates for two reasons ; resultant of forces is null or perpendicular on axis that these are resolved by changing stator angle , Magnetic shielding , displacement of backrest or use multi axes ! so we can change forces direction resultant and make it unsymmetrical to resolve mentioned reasons.
*instruments technology should be use in all stages to give accurate direction. "

25. Sorry, that's all just gobbledegook to me.

26. Let's get this straight:

It's a "magnetic generator".
It's an "electro motor".
It will "rotate forever".

This is not a novelty desk toy, or demonstration illustrating the impossibility of perpetual motion machines? This device is claimed to give free energy, forever?

I'm sorry but that's like claiming to have flown in a real alien spaceship. Lots of people claim it, and it's never worth checking.

27. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
For the lifetime of the battery anyway.
You are paranoid of perpetual motion. Ha-ha.

I do not even know if a series wound DC motor, with the coils and armature wound in series, is more or less efficient then a ceramic magnet motor. Do you?

But the ceramic magnets are a diode, created by structure. They alter the flow of ambient radiation. When other objects come in their vicinity, the other objects can be effected by the diode that often causes the objects to move, or want to move towards the magnet if the object is not magnitized. Or another magnet can be attracted, where the other magnets pole is not the same as the poles facing one another.

The magnet may also cause other magnetized objects to move away. The reason would be due to the diode of one magnet being of the same polarity of the other magnet. At the joining or meeting faces. This causes a repulsion. It is because it is easier for ambient radiation to pass between the two magnets then it is for the ambient radiation to pass around the two magnets.

http://www.Rockwelder.com/Flash/Magn...MagnetsHow.htm

I did not draw in all the mind boggling ambient radiation making this happen. However, it gives you an idea of what the basic causes are.

Sincerely,

William McCormick

28. Originally Posted by Pong
Let's get this straight:

It's a "magnetic generator".
It's an "electro motor".
It will "rotate forever".

This is not a novelty desk toy, or demonstration illustrating the impossibility of perpetual motion machines? This device is claimed to give free energy, forever?

I'm sorry but that's like claiming to have flown in a real alien spaceship. Lots of people claim it, and it's never worth checking.
You have to understand that people that know about perpetual motion have great respect for it. It can happen here and there accidentally and kill you.

You may find a brave soul here or there that will attest to creating a perpetual motion accident. No incoming power but the thing kept going.

I can create it. But at this time with our very poor science, and poor devices it might be a bit crazy to do so, to any useful purpose.

To just demonstrate it is nothing, but you get people like Harold just sitting back and saying "Power your house with it, then I will get one" I have all to do to live through demonstrating it safely.

Of course we have perpetual motion, now can we use it safely or make use of it. That is my only question. The nuclear plants are part of holding our resources hostage. I don't know how old you are. But to get those ridiculous nuclear plants pushed through. They swore that an accident was not possible. I mean they said if it happened they are not engineers. We knew it was just a matter of weeks or months of years.

They never highlighted the accident in the 50's that wiped out everyone in the small reactor building. When the rods became exposed. The whole project was deemed asinine. It was only in the late sixties and early seventies, that it re-emerged.

At that time there were still Americans that did value their lives. And they would not have agreed to retards building doomsday devices, in their backyards. Now they have no real recourse. After backing them with hopes of lower rates.

They originally tricked real scientists by calling the radio transmitter plants, nuclear plants because of the slight disintegration that radio waves cause. So we thought they were just going to build a radio wave collector plant and everything was looking up. Instead they built the most ridiculous thing on earth. With a dangerous track record.

I would think you could power the United States with a small generator, if you understand electricity. But I would think that many small generating stations would give better back up and recovery from disasters. As well as all the kids having a friend or family member creating electricity and understanding it.

I was at a power plant in my hometown. It is just a backup system, to be used in case of emergency. It was overdone in my opinion, to much complication. But that is what sells today. Or is allowed today.

It requires them to pump up the natural gas to 600 psi. Pretty dangerous if you ask me.

Here was the old backup generator they are replacing with the jet engine. I believe it is a Mitsubishi 13,000 horse power ship engine adapted to be a generator.

Sincerely,

William McCormick

29. Originally Posted by William McCormick
To just demonstrate it is nothing, but you get people like Harold just sitting back and saying "Power your house with it, then I will get one" I have all to do to live through demonstrating it safely.
Yeah, yeah. There's always some excuse why you can't do it, isn't there?

30. Plus, if it's burning natural gas, it's already obvious it's not a perpetual motion machine.

31. Originally Posted by Harold14370
Originally Posted by William McCormick
To just demonstrate it is nothing, but you get people like Harold just sitting back and saying "Power your house with it, then I will get one" I have all to do to live through demonstrating it safely.
Yeah, yeah. There's always some excuse why you can't do it, isn't there?
I can certainly take a spark of energy from a nine volt battery and wipe out quarter inch rods of steel. Now that certainly is not something a small spark from a nine volt battery is seen by multi subatomic particle scientists, as being possible.

Yet even if I do it, you will still say well, when others are lighting their houses with it I will believe it.

If everyone was like you there would not have been a revolution in America. Benjamin Franklin would never have gotten me the knowledge that colleges do not understand electricity as he did over two hundred years ago.

Sincerely,

William McCormick

32. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Plus, if it's burning natural gas, it's already obvious it's not a perpetual motion machine.
How is the planet you are on? What do my posts look like from that planet? Do you read them right to left? Or stand on your heads?

Sincerely,

William McCormick

33. You want to explain that last post, because it doesn't seem to have anything to do with anything. If you think the combustion of natural gas is a perpetual motion machine, you're more of an idiot than I ever imagined.

34. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
You want to explain that last post, because it doesn't seem to have anything to do with anything. If you think the combustion of natural gas is a perpetual motion machine, you're more of an idiot than I ever imagined.

When did I ever say that a natural gas generator is a perpetual motion machine? I never did.

Off the subject, there are chemical reactions that could make it one. Ha-ha. You could take the carbon dioxide and turn it into carbon monoxide, and then turn the carbon monoxide into carbon, and then combine it with water, burn off the hydrogen and some carbon to get water and carbon dioxide again. By using heat or an electric ARC to recreate and purify the original carbon, in the natural gas.

You might be able to use aluminum to pull the carbon out of carbon dioxide as well. It is pretty cheap. There are a lot of ways you could do it.

Sincerely,

William McCormick

35. Originally Posted by William McCormick
Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Plus, if it's burning natural gas, it's already obvious it's not a perpetual motion machine.
How is the planet you are on? What do my posts look like from that planet? Do you read them right to left? Or stand on your heads?

Sincerely,

William McCormick
You want to explain what you were trying to say here then? If you didn't have a problem with what I was saying then you must have just been babbling, I guess.

36. Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Originally Posted by William McCormick
Originally Posted by MagiMaster
Plus, if it's burning natural gas, it's already obvious it's not a perpetual motion machine.
How is the planet you are on? What do my posts look like from that planet? Do you read them right to left? Or stand on your heads?

Sincerely,

William McCormick
You want to explain what you were trying to say here then? If you didn't have a problem with what I was saying then you must have just been babbling, I guess.

My posts are in English. Not the epitome of English literature. However they are legible to many.

I was saying that you read a post I made, about my hometowns backup generating system, and you somehow construe that it meant, that I thought it was a perpetual motion plant?

And although, with devices after the turbine, you could create more power then the turbine is generating. I do not believe the plant is setup that way.

Sincerely,

William McCormick

37. Alright. I may have misunderstood at least part of what you wrote. Still, nothing that burns fuel can ever be a perpetual motion machine.

38. Here is an ultimatum....

Perpetual Motion exists only in Ideal Conditions.

Now is reality Ideal?

 Bookmarks
##### Bookmarks
 Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement